At the end of the Mexican-American war the United States had complete control over Mexico and probably could have annexed all of it, but only chose to take about half the land where there was little population. So,

1. Was this a mistake and should the US had taken all of Mexico? and

2. Would the Mexican people be better off today if this was done? and

3. How might US history had played out if all of Mexico was part of the US?

2. I do believe the Mexican people would be much better off today if they were living in the United States.

3. My guess is we would probably even be a stronger country with a more diverse culture with more bilingual educated people. I also believe we would have made better use of Mexico's oil and been able to capitalize on having their natural resources more optimally than they have.

1. I don't think that it would have been possible to annex all of Mexico in the first place. The USA would have been viewed as an imperialist occupier by the overwhelming majority of Mexicans, and there wasn't enough US military power to permanantly occupy Mexico or the political will to do so.

The Mexican-American war wasn't universally supported or popular in the US. President Polk was elected primarily by carrrying the southern states, and their interest in adding numerous "free states" would have been low(Slavery had been abolished in Mexico since 1811). In general, the states that supported the war the most wouldn't have supported the annexation.

2. The US doesn't have the greatest track record of treating non-white males very well, especially during the 19th and 20th centuries. That institutionalised discrimanation(and worse) has had a negative impact to this very day, so I'd say it's debatable.

3. Hypothetically, if the US had annexed Mexico, then the effect that would have had on the balance of power between slave and free states would have caused southern seccession to occur earlier. Without the south, the dificulty of keeping control of Mexico would have increased quite a bit logistically. And if secccession resulted in a civil war, then Mexico definitely breaks away as well.

1. I don't think that it would have been possible to annex all of Mexico in the first place. The USA would have been viewed as an imperialist occupier by the overwhelming majority of Mexicans, and there wasn't enough US military power to permanantly occupy Mexico or the political will to do so.

The Mexican-American war wasn't universally supported or popular in the US. President Polk was elected primarily by carrrying the southern states, and their interest in adding numerous "free states" would have been low(Slavery had been abolished in Mexico since 1811). In general, the states that supported the war the most wouldn't have supported the annexation.

2. The US doesn't have the greatest track record of treating non-white males very well, especially during the 19th and 20th centuries. That institutionalised discrimanation(and worse) has had a negative impact to this very day, so I'd say it's debatable.

3. Hypothetically, if the US had annexed Mexico, then the effect that would have had on the balance of power between slave and free states would have caused southern seccession to occur earlier. Without the south, the dificulty of keeping control of Mexico would have increased quite a bit logistically. And if secccession resulted in a civil war, then Mexico definitely breaks away as well.

Pretty much agree with this. Much as I'd like to say that Mexicans would be reaping the benefits of the US economy right now, I think it's far more likely the US would simply have created another racial underclass, which has been its standard way of dealing with new ethnic groups since the 1600s. Remember that the Irish weren't even considered "white" until the late 19th century, and then it was only to promote white solidarity against African-Americans.